3 ms·

Because if someone get a map that says train A leaves at time B, and it doesn't, it's MTA employees who will be on the receiving end of the angry customer, a go

by jerf 7y ago

Because if someone get a map that says train A leaves at time B, and it doesn't, it's MTA employees who will be on the receiving end of the angry customer, a good proportion of which won't care that it wasn't an official schedule (and some small fraction of that basically won't understand the difference between official and unofficial schedule). The fact the train didn't show up will also impact your reputation for timeliness, even if it was never your promise it would be there. Plus, you know, if we can stretch our imaginations for a moment and imagine that maybe the organization gives a fractional iota of a damn about the customer's lives even beyond the direct impact to them, it's not a good customer experience for bad info to be floating around either. (Maybe not, you know, the NYC MTA, but at least some organizations are still small enough to at least think about that sometimes.)

nybble41 7y ago
They're not suing over bad data (unless it came from them to begin with). As this is a copyright case, they're suing over the parts that match their own official publications. It's also not necessarily true that third-party data is worse than the official sources; in some cases it can even be superior.
- jerf 7y ago
  The post I was replying to asked why the agencies exert control at all, a broader context than this particular copyright issue. I was explaining why they might find that in their interests. "It's also not necessarily true that third-party data is worse than the official sources; in some cases it can even be superior." Well, an organization is hardly going to use that as part of its decision making. Organizations are essentially incapable of admitting that their job is being better done by someone else. So in terms of answering the question as it was asked it's not terribly relevant. If you want to know why an organization might want to control its schedules, you need to empathize with it and put yourself it its/their shoes, not come at it as if you're still an outsider. Having extreme distaste for the organization merely means you're going to empathize and put yourself in the shoes of an organization you don't like; it doesn't change the basic procedure for understanding it.

by jerf 7y ago

nybble41 7y ago

They're not suing over bad data (unless it came from them to begin with). As this is a copyright case, they're suing over the parts that match their own official publications. It's also not necessarily true that third-party data is worse than the official sources; in some cases it can even be superior.

jerf 7y ago
The post I was replying to asked why the agencies exert control at all, a broader context than this particular copyright issue. I was explaining why they might find that in their interests. "It's also not necessarily true that third-party data is worse than the official sources; in some cases it can even be superior." Well, an organization is hardly going to use that as part of its decision making. Organizations are essentially incapable of admitting that their job is being better done by someone else. So in terms of answering the question as it was asked it's not terribly relevant. If you want to know why an organization might want to control its schedules, you need to empathize with it and put yourself it its/their shoes, not come at it as if you're still an outsider. Having extreme distaste for the organization merely means you're going to empathize and put yourself in the shoes of an organization you don't like; it doesn't change the basic procedure for understanding it.